UNSOLVED HISTORY - Roswell (Partial Review)

Discovery Channel - Original Air Date: 2002-2005
A.K.A. UFOs Over America

Unsolved History takes a scientific look at three UFO events: the original Kenneth Arnold sighting, the Captain Mantel crash, and Roswell.  I came in late on this broadcast, so I'll summarize the parts I didn't see based on the show's recap and my previous viewing.  Based on a recreation, the show concludes that the Arnold sighting could not have occurred at the speed or altitude that Arnold thought, and that at least part of his sighting may have been caused by reflections in the cockpit windows.  (Have you ever seen a reflection in a car window and thought it to be something in the sky?  I have.)  Sorry I don't have full details on that one.  The Captain Mantell UFO sighting and crash is recreated using a period airplane and special effects technology.  The recreation, using a model of a skyhook balloon, suggests that the captain could have easily mistaken a high-flying balloon for a disc-shaped object much closer to his craft.  The captain then climbed higher than he should have and, without a proper oxygen supply, passed out and crashed.  Finally, the show looks at the Roswell story concerning both the crash and the alien bodies, positing that over time, memories could have been distorted and perhaps combined (as suggested in the military's report).  The experiment that follows subjects unsuspecting witnesses (who believe they're on a high-tech nature walk) to a fake UFO crash site, complete with yellow tape and military guards.  Each participant is equipped with a helmet camera, so the scientists can determine what each observer actually saw and when.  The scientists then collect the data and, a month later, interview the witnesses.  And what they discover is striking: even after just a month, the witness testimonies are highly inaccurate and seem to have been heavily influenced not only by what the other witnesses initially said they saw, but by preconceived ideas of what a UFO crash site incident should be like.  Some subjects even swear to events that never happened and claim to have seen things their helmet cams show they didn't see.  The implications for Roswell -- where the incident turned from a balloon crash (after initial UFO reports) in 1947 into a UFO legend with bodies and a government cover up in 1980 (more than 30 years later) -- are obvious.  If witnesses are unreliable after 1 month, how reliable can they be after (now) 60 years?  Recent research (see the Radio Lab podcast) suggests that memories are subject to change every time we recall them.  That fact and this recreation make it seem obvious that the simplest explanation for the so-called Roswell Incident is the one offered by 1990s Air Force report: a classified balloon crash and subsequent tests with "witness" memories distorted by time.  Thus is born a legend.

UNSOLVED HISTORY - The Bermuda Triangle

Discovery Channel - Original Air Date: 2002-2005
A.K.A. Diving to the Bermuda Triangle

Another intriguing entry in the Unsolved History paranormal investigation series. One theory that might explain some of the disappearances is a sudden bubbling up of methane gas "frozen" in the bottom of the deep trenches within the Triangle. Experiments on this show prove both that large bubbles from the deep can sink ships and that methane clouds can confuse airplane instruments, which use pressure to determine altitude. They also prove that methane can also cause airplane engines to stall out. So, while there are no confirmed methane-caused sinkings or crashes, the theory does fit the MO of many Triangle disappearances. The show also investigate the mystery of Flight 19, and discovers 5 Avengers (the type of missing planes) on the bottom of the sea -- though these planes turn out to not be from the flight. (Though the show doesn't mention it, I believe the planes were later discovered to be part of a Navy dumping program -- though I don't have a concrete reference for that currently.) All in all, this show is a good presentation of a "natural" theory that might explain the Triangle disappearnces -- though most skeptics still believe the Triangle has no statistical significance.

UFO HUNTERS - Hist. - Military vs. UFOs

History Channel - Original Air Date: 2/27/09

Well, my normal uncanny programs took Wednesday night off, so -- despite a previous vow -- I found myself tuning in to History's UFO Hunters again. The case this week was about the Rendlesham Forest UFO sightings in England, back in 1980 (another "cold" case, almost 30 years old). Yet, as usual, this is exactly the kind of case this show wants to investigate; with the fog of time clouding memories, it's much easier to buy into the UFO myths than to actually investigate. And, as usual, these folks don't investigate what the UFOs were; they already know what they were -- UFOs are intelligently controlled alien craft that have been visiting earth for years and whose existence is being covered up by the government. With that as a premise (the given "facts" of the "investigation"), there are only two things for the group to do: 1) they can talk to witnesses, or descendants of witnesses (they do), and 2) they can try to disprove the skeptical theories about the sightings. The witness testimony is interesting and compelling this time, including several highly credible witnesses with incredible stories. There's also a forester presented as a counter witness -- he thinks the UFO "tracks" are rabbit made -- but his opinions are quickly discounted. (After all, he doesn't support the theory that UFOs exist and are controlled by aliens.) The highlight of this show is a recreation of a skeptical explanation of the encounter. Skeptics have posited that a nearby lighthouse might have been responsible for the Rendlesham lights. The crew sets up an elaborate scale model of the area in their base and proves that the lighthouse "couldn't" have been responsible. Then they discover a witness who tells them that the landward side of the lite has always been shielded anyway; it can only shine out to sea. (They could have saved a lot of time and money making that model if they'd talked to this witness first.) So, hurray! They've disproved a skeptical theory, and the team leader (the publisher of UFO Magazine) declares the "investigation" a success. But, as usual, they haven't actually proven anything. They have witness testimony, but no actual evidence to support the existence of UFOs or their theory that UFOs are craft controlled by aliens. Of course, they don't need any proof, because they've already bought in to their own premise. I've seldom seen anyone so proud of accomplishing so little. Again, this is not an investigation show, it's a mythbuilding show. So, if you buy into their premise, you'll probably enjoy it. As for me, I'll keep hoping for better science. (And if you want to see how reliable eyewitnesses are in this kind of case, see Unsolved History's UFO show - reviewed elsewhere in this blog.)

AMERICA'S LOCH NESS

Discover Channel -- Original Air Date: 2003

A good survey of the Lake Champlain monster, often known as Champ.  This show features witnesses, lake experts, and skeptics in a good mix.  The skeptics recreate the most famous of the Champ photos, and revise the size estimate down from 6 feet tall to 3, which -- the skeptics point out -- does not mean it's not a monster; it just means the object in the photo isn't as large as the photographer thought.  The show also features a number of videos which, as always, are maddeningly fuzzy but claim to show the monster.  A sonar survey of the lake turns up no monsters, but plenty of places where a monster might hide.  Perhaps the most interesting result is the underwater sounds expert who finds what seems to be a sonar click - though no animals in the lake are known to use sonar for navigation or hunting.  The conclusion is summed up by a searcher who notes that unless you drain the whole lake, you can never prove that the monster doesn't exist.

SASQUATCH: LEGEND MEETS SCIENCE

Discovery Channel (Wild Discovery) - Original Air Date: January 9, 2003

This show brings an impressive variety of scientific tests and experts to the question of whether or not bigfoot is real. In the show, they make you wait until the end to find out the conclusions, but cataloging conclusions is what this column is about. The finger print expert opines that the dermal ridges suggest that a non-human great ape is living in North America. The Memorial Day Footage crew, using survey equipment and a world-class runner concludes that the creature in the film is man sized, with a man-like stride, and moving well within human norms (about half as fast as the sprinter). The Freeman footage suggests a large creature, but no conclusion on whether this is real or fake. The sonic cry analysis suggests in might be human or from a primate. Hair sequencing comes out human or near human. Footprint analysis suggests a distribution of sizes suggestive of a living population. A cast expert believes the Skookum print is from an unknown hominid primate. And CGI recreation of the Patterson film suggests the subject is non-human. This last conclusion makes me wonder about the others, as the "muscle anomaly" pointed out by the expert on the thigh of the Patterson film looks more like a "suit malfunction" to me. (A patch of fur coming loose.) Also, the CGI suggestion that the stride is non-human is at odds with evidence from Is It Real? (and other sources) showing not only is the stride possible for a human, but that there is a specific human with that stride--Bob Heironimus. So, while individually the science seems sound enough, perhaps it would have been better to examine fewer aspects of the phenomenon--or expand the show from one hour to two and bring more than one expert to bear on some of the subjects. The Memorial Day Footage had a whole team of relevant experts, whereas the Patterson footage team was so diverse as to have little overlap for checking of conclusions. (One doing CGI, one checking on the movement & muscle anatomy, etc...)

CONSPIRACY MOON LANDING

National Geographic Channel - Original Air Date: Unknown

This show carefully examines the conspiracy theories regarding whether the Apollo astronauts actually landed on the moon.  Conspiracy theorists insist that the landings were a hoax, and they have all manner of "evidence" to prove it.  Evidence includes "anomalies" in existing moon photos, and theories as to what would "actually" happen on the moon, if people had really landed there: for instance,according to theorists, the LEM's rocket system should have dug a crater in the moon dust.  The show looks at the theorists claims one by one, and thoroughly debunks them.  Largely, the people proposing the theories have neither the scientific nor the photographic expertise to know what they're talking about.  This show proves that the theorists' "common sense" approach to what should happen on the moon is just not sensible, and it proves this time and time and time again.  Yet, the theorists hold to their theories, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.  Mystery hunters of all stripes -- cryptozoologists, UFO hunters, ghost busters -- should take note; when you stubbornly hold to your beliefs despite the facts, you harm both your own reputation and that of others in your field.  Ignore the facts enough times, and soon you'll have no more credibility than the people who insist that astronauts never landed on the moon.  All investigators would do well to remember Occam's Razor: All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best.

UFOs Over Phoenix - Partial Review

Discovery Channel - Original Air Date: 1997?

I just caught a few minutes of this recently, though I've seen the full show in the past.  The part I saw that's worth noting is the show's dramatic and convincing explanation for the 10pm (I believe) set of Phoenix Lights: they were flares.  UFOlogists reject this idea out of hand, but the show has a demonstration that the "winking out" of the lights coincides with them disappearing behind a mountain range.  This is accomplished by aligning the original "UFO" footage with daytime footage taken in the same spot.  You can literally see the lights going behind the mountain--which means they weren't over the city, but were on the other side of the range, where the military was conducting exercises (and dropping flares).  I don't remember whether the show had an explanation for the earlier sightings of V-shaped craft (probably not), but the footage you always see of this incident -- on Larry King, for instance --  is definitely flares.  UFOlogists don't do themselves any favors when they ignore conclusive proof like this; it makes them look like kooks.  It also wastes time and resources that could be spent on investigating actual, unexplained incidents.